CNN: No nuclear weapons in South Korea, says President Moon
Seoul (CNN)South Korean President Moon Jae-in has dismissed the possibility of deploying nuclear weapons in his country, warning it could "lead to a nuclear arms race in northeast Asia."
"I do not agree that South Korea needs to develop our own nuclear weapons or relocate tactical nuclear weapons in the face of North Korea's nuclear threat," he told CNN Thursday in his first televised interview since North Korea's sixth nuclear test.
Though he was not supportive of deploying or pursuing nuclear weapons, Moon said South Korea "needs to develop our military capabilities in the face of North Korea's nuclear advancement."
Read more ....
WNU Editor: South Korean President Moon Jae-in's rational for not wanting nuclear arms is that it may spur an arms race .... South Korea Opposes Nuclear Weapons Deployment Over Risk of Arms Race With North (Sputnik). Memo to South Korean President Moon Jae-in .... there is already a nuclear arms race in the north of your country with your country in the cross-airs.
6 comments:
He must assume the US nuclear guarantee is credible. Under President Trump it is. In 5 years time will it? Under Obama was it? Under another President will it? Plenty of reason to doubt that guarantee over the next 5-10 years. It's a new world with the EU actively working against the US's role in the world, never mind China and Russia doing what they've been doing.
I think it's a very mature and humane position and I applaud him for that. Having said that. .is he crazy? :)) it takes some balls to do that. My assumption is that he wants to stay out of this. To him, North Koreans are his distant brothers and they won't really go through with killing them (the south Koreans) unless they have to - and they only have to, if south Korea had nuclear weapons and would pose an existential threat to the north. I get that. But this assumes that North Korea acts like most other states - has a rational leadership and checks and balances in place. Of course it doesn't have checks and balances - it's a completely totalitarian state. And I wouldn't bet my money on Kim Jong Un to behave rationally. He has family members killed and tortured. Do we forget about all these things? I don't think Un would go out of his way to attack the South - because I think he ultimately is OK with just owning north Korea and live his luxury dictator life there to the fullest. But in case there ever is war between the US and north Korea - in his last moments - he might lash out against everyone, and send a few nukes over to the south and even China. If south Korea and China think they are safe in this mess, they are wrong. No one is really safe until he's gone. Or did they forget how his brother died? Or his generals?
to anon who things trump ok but obama not
thus far, trump has done nothing but add on some few more sanctions to what Obama had put in place and we all know that Russia and China continue to deal economically with N. Korea...so what assurances do you have about Trump? oh, right. He talked tough when some missle went off. And then did nothing.
South Korea produced fission warheads in the 1970s. So did Japan. Both nations have had the facilities required for enrichment, and the industrial and scientific capacity required to manufacture warheads, for decades. This is one of the reasons Trump is so blasé about Japan and the ROK having nukes: he knows they already have them.
Fun fact: Japan researched fission warheads during the Second World War, and its scientists had an excellent grasp of the practicalities of building a fission weapon. They simply lacked the resources and time needed to beat the Americans to the draw – by quite a margin. (The Manhattan Project was, above all else, a vast economic undertaking. At one point, it requisitioned a quarter of all American copper stocks. It took up a bast proportion of the war effort. The Japanese couldn't compete with that.)
South Korea had an active fission warhead program in the 1960s and 70s. You're supposed to believe that when the USA found out about this, and asked South Korea to desist, the South Koreans complied. Sure. I buy that. After the Blue House raid, the DPRK making numerous assassination attempts on South Korea's leadership, and the DPRK bringing the bulk of its forces to within 50 miles of Seoul, the South Koreans abandoned their nuclear program simply because they were asked to...
Both Japan and the ROK have fission warheads on hand today. In the Japanese case, they are disassembled. Japanese governments are sticklers for jumping through bureaucratic hoops, and this disassembly allows them to say with a straight face that they have no nuclear warheads. They don't. Just the components, ready for reassembly. The South Korean government is more direct, and simply says that the ROK has no nukes.
Why haven't 99.99% of readers of this blog heard all of this before now? You don't read the right arms control journals. This is all very real.
Why don't the Japanese or the South Koreans admit to their respective citizenries that they have nukes, and have had them for decades? You don't need to be a nuclear physicist to work that one out. The secretive development of nukes isn't something that you can reveal without major international repercussions - and this was especially true in Japan and South Korea during the 1970s, when the warheads were produced. It's the kind of thing that could bring down a government.
When your citizens don't think you have nukes, they're happier to tolerate American bases, and American bases make you a little more secure from attack. No would-be aggressor wants to tangle with the USA, if it can help it.
Once you've started a cover up, it's harder to do a 180 and admit the truth.
There's no conspiracy theory to this: just rather predictable realpolitik.
The actions of the South Korean leader appear to make no sense. It's a bit like gun free zones. All they accomplish is to make people less safe as the criminals know they don't have to worry about someone fighting back.
If South Korea will not allow the US to deploy nuclear weapons there nor will it develop its own, this puts the US in a very difficult spot, placing our personnel in even more danger, and severely undermining our ability to keep our committment here. In such an environment, the US would simply have no choice but to withdraw from the "alliance" with South Korea.
At that point, the US will need to develop a strategy for dealing with the North Korean threat to us completely separate and independent from South Korea. This needs to be made crystal clear to the South Koreans and their leaders. Frankly, if we were unencumbered by South Korea, this would make dealing with North Korea much easier. For example, if "fire and fury" were necessary to defend America, we would not need to worry about how this might affect South Korea making the job less difficult for the US military to carry out the mission of defending America.
Many of America's "allies" have been using and abusing America for decades. South Korea is and has been one of the worst abusers. As such, jettisoning them has much upside potential with little downside risk. At least, given the current nature of the alliance, this is the case. If they change behavior, this may change.
There is another possibility that may explain the South Korean leader's behsvior. According to a survey approximately 15 years ago or so 34% of South Korean military officers viewed North Korea as the main enemy while 33% viewed the United States as the main enemy. There's little reason to believe this would have changed in a material way. It's also highly likely these attitudes are prevelant throughout the South Korean military and the society as a whole.
If the South Korean leader is among the 33% faction who views America as the main enemy, while I think such beliefs are fundamentally misguided, his actions would make sense. Either way America's response should be the same. Either allow America to deploy nuclear weapons or develop your own. Failure to do so means an immediate end to the alliance.
Ftankly, South Korea should develop its own nuclear arsenal. Perhaps the American guarantees are ironclad today. They may not always be. Doing so would likely strengthen the alliance. At least we'd have a chance at a real alliance instead of the current situation where South Korea jerks us around.
If the South Korean leader is among the factiin
Anon # 4,
You may be on to something here. I've long suspected these nations could develop nukes quickly. I do recall reading something along the lines of what you posted a few years ago. Perhaps I dismissed it at the time. I hadn't given it much more thought.
The 7th paragraph "when your citizens think you don't have nukes" is pretty much spot on. I would add when the Americans are stupid enough to allow them to you to use them as pawns in your power struggles why not do so.
The situation has come to the point where America can no longer afford to have bases around the world. Furthermore it is undermining our security and economic growth. These nations are simply going to have to adjust as will America.
Post a Comment